Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

View

Discuss

Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

coondoggie writes "The U.S. Department of Transportation has high hopes of standardizing the way autos talk to each other and with other intelligent roadway systems of the future. The department recently issued a call for public and private researchers and experts to help it build what the DOT called 'a hypothetical four layer approach to connected vehicle devices and applications certification.'"

On modern cars, all the systems are already connected to each other via CAN (or similar), so they're already halfway there. Then you can attach a Bluetooth OBDII device, and do the last step yourself;)

Standardized toll pass would allow cash-strapped counties to collect tolls from out of county residents. Just like "speeding" tickets, only there is no such thing as driving slowly to get around it.

The Massachusetts Turnpike already does that without the EZ pass. Say you're an out-of-state driver who has never heard of the Mass Pike, so you turn onto a clearly-labeled interstate, follow a one-way road for a little bit, and BAM! Hit by a surprise toll. Better hope you've got cash, sucker, 'cause there's nowhere else to go!

Actually you have hit on an important point. The EZ-pass systems can easily be implemented in a privacy-protecting fashion (allowing you to buy them anonymously and pay cash) but somehow never are. Hmm.

I think we can be pretty sure that however these protocols are designed, privacy and security will not be taken into account.

I disagree. How would we otherwise establish a protocol for fully automated cars to flip each other for cutting off? There is no way around Turing Test for Strong AI, and this is key aspect of human behavior.

Wow, that's scary. Whoever is buying that data can just look who's garage you park at every night to figure out who you are. The same thing goes if you have a cell phone carrier that sells your location data.

"In 2011, OnStar did announce that it would start retaining all the information collected by the GPS and internal system, so that it could be sold to third parties (possibly insurance companies).[13] Although this data is supposed to be “anonymized”, it remains unclear exactly what they mean by this as it is extremely difficult to anonymize GPS data."

18. WHAT IF YOUR CAR IS STOLEN? If your Car is stolen, we can try to locate it. Before we try to locate it, you’ll need to provide satisfactory identification, and the police must be treating the Car as stolen. Generally, we will only provide location information about stolen Cars to the police; however, in cases of crises or emergencies, we may, in our own judgment, provide you with information about the general area of your Car without police involvement. OnStar may be notified by an early warning system that your Car may have been stolen and, in some cases, you may also be notified by OnStar. We don’t have to continue to try to locate your Car after 48 hours from the time you first report it stolen, and we can’t guarantee that we’ll find it. We also aren’t required to try to find your Car for the purpose of locating someone.

Your Car may have Stolen Vehicle Slowdown capability that enables OnStar to slow down your stolen Car remotely and/or the capability that enables OnStar to stop your Car from starting to assist law enforcement in its recovery. OnStar may also slow down your Car or stop your Car from starting if required to comply with legal requirements, including valid court orders in criminal investigations and to protect the safety of you or others.

If you don’t want Stolen Vehicle Slowdown capability on your Car, you must contact OnStar by pressing the blue OnStar button in your Car and request that this capability be disabled. If you choose to disable this capability, it will not be available under any circumstances and can only be re-enabled at an authorized car dealership at your expense.

Emphasis added to highlight the scary.

Now, where the heck is that OnStar module in my truck, and how to remove/disable it...

They're doing it wrong, though. I gave this some thought a couple of years back, when smart cars were first being touted. I believe that a good system would implement the following rules:
1. No car may ask another car about anything. All communication is one-way and voluntary.
2. Participating cars transmit a randomly chosen IPv6 address as a unique identifier. It is changed every morning when you start the car.
3. In addition to this address, cars transmit their intended destination.
4. Your car only knows

In the short run, the real question for me will not be how the cars communicate with each other, but how they handle the cars that do not communicate at all. Nobody wants to swap engine oil at 75MPH with the VW Bus going 55 just because the bus wasn't communicating. Just like how nobody wants to meet the driver of that car that had to stop short to avoid a hazard.

I think for me, the biggest feature I'd like to see is a HUD that gives me a relative speed on the cars around me along with warning indicators communicated from cars ahead when debris is noted on the road. Hate that last-minute slight swerve to dodge a thrown tyre-tread that I couldn't see until the swerve.

In the short run, the real question for me will not be how the cars communicate with each other, but how they handle the cars that do not communicate at all. Nobody wants to swap engine oil at 75MPH with the VW Bus going 55 just because the bus wasn't communicating. Just like how nobody wants to meet the driver of that car that had to stop short to avoid a hazard.

All non-automated vehicles should be required to immediately be retrofitted with beacons that identify their GPS location, speed, and whether any indicators are illuminated (brake lights, turn signals). This enhancement could be added to any vehicle with a minimum amount of effort. This at least simplifies things somewhat.

Privacy concerns? You're kidding, right? Look, we're either going to automate the roads or we aren't. If we are, the devices have to be able to communicate, which means that a device is going to be uniquely identifiable for at least the duration of a single period of operation. That's unavoidable. And we need to eventually end the use of manually driven vehicles for safety reasons, so the privacy issues simply have to take a back seat in this case. If you want to protect privacy, make it a crime to i

There's nothing that can be done with this sort of automation that couldn't be done with license plate scanning, so even in the worst case, it's a no-op privacy-wise, not a reduction.

Safety is the main reason for this, followed closely by the convenience of not having to waste your commute time paying attention to the road. The reason we don't build rails is that rails are infeasible in many places. There are remarkably low limits to how fast a rail-based system can climb (slope-wise), limits to their tu

The security model should certainly include signed messages. I wouldn't want to see a repeat of the ADS-B debacle. However, I trust that nothing can't be spoofed or hacked by someone. The private keys could leak out, or even be selectively tampered with by someone with authority.

To solve this, I'd like to see a security model that included a crowd-sourced "validity" rating of the other nearby vehicles. It's not enough that each vehicle sends a signed message. Each vehicle should be comparing the messag

Seriously, this is annoying as heck. Either because they're going under the speed limit, or they're going at the exact-speed as the guy in the next lane and blocking traffic. And the highways by me are plastered with "Left lane pass only" or "keep to right except to pass"

Under the speed limit is obvious...

But the same-speed thing bothers me. NOT when it's rush hour... there's nothing to be done about that.

But it's mid-day and some idiot decides to cruise on the left-lane at the EXACT speed as the guy in the next lane. Nobody in front of either of them as far as the eye can see. So traffic is building up and up behind them and causing congestion because nobody can pass these 2-or-3 cars in front of them.

If you want to be going as the same speed as the guy in the middle or right lane, then GET IN the middle or right lane!

ADDENDUM... especially when the left-lane idiot is going the same speed as the dump-truck next to him. So everyone is getting pelted with small pebbles and things and are unable to pass.

ADDENDUM... especially when the left-lane idiot is going the same speed as the dump-truck next to him. So everyone is getting pelted with small pebbles and things and are unable to pass.

I don't need a new government standard to fix this. I already put a pair of pneumatically-driven TRAIN HORNS connected to a deep cycle marine battery and isolated with a big honking 1 farad capacitor and an industrial-grade current limiter under the hood. It's good for about 20 seconds of SWEET MOTHER OF GOD sound before it spends the next half hour recharging off the alternator.

Believe me... people get out of the way when their car is literally shaking from the noise behind them. And yes, I did dynamat the entire passenger compartment, even the firewall... which makes for whisper-quiet drives until HORN OF DEATH is activated. I have four sets of industrial-grade ear protection and a pack of disposable ear plugs in the glove box, because I measured the SPL at over 120dB even with all the sound-dampening. Unfortunately, the windshield itself transmits a significant amount of vibration through it and there's no practical way to fix that problem...

I've only had to use this weapons-grade horn a couple of times, but let me say, the effects were immediate. Make sure you have plenty of distance between the vehicle in front of you when you hit the button... people have a funny habit of standing on the brakes when their world turns a vibrating shade of red.

I personally guarantee you though... you'll be able to pass anyone after pushing the big blue button.

I was set to purchase a set of semi truck air horns and the rig to run them when my wife asked, "What is that?" I told her, and that was the end of that project. Should have waited until she left for work. . .

A similar technique is quite effective for tailgaters. If you want to go faster than me I'm happy to let you pass, but sometimes that can't happen because it's one lane, it's icy, or I just have to get past the even slower guys to my right. You don't need to kiss my car in these situations -- I know you're there!

So in high school I rigged a dashboard switch to the brake lights. If an annoying tailgater decided to touch the back of my car I simply held down the switch...which never failed to open up some

So in high school I rigged a dashboard switch to the brake lights. If an annoying tailgater decided to touch the back of my car I simply held down the switch...which never failed to open up some space!

You don't really need to do that. Most vehicle brakes light before any significant pressure is applied -- you can usually trip it with just a light touch (not enough to affect speed). Unless your car is very new or the brakes were just replaced, there's usually enough play to get the light to come on.

That's some of the dumbest advice I've ever read on the internet. Let's cause and accident at highway speeds!I think I speak for all of us when I say please swerve into a pylon next time you try it so the guy behind you doesn't have to.

Truck speed limits are usually quite a bit slower than car speed limits, so it's a safe bet that if you're passing a truck and only going slightly faster than the truck, you're going 5–10 MPH under the posted car speed limit.

You do realize that he's complaining about people engaging in illegal practices, right? Where I live, cops regularly enforce the "Left lane for passing only" signs that were posted within the last year on our main freeway. If you're in the left lane and not passing the guy next to you, you'll earn yourself a citation pretty quickly because what you're doing is not only illegal, it also endangers everyone else on the road by causing cars to pile up behind you, thus increasing the likelihood of an accident significantly.

Your chief calling while driving is not to abide by the law, but to drive safely. Following the law is the best way to drive safely in about 99% of situations, but the laws are inadequate at times, and it is not your responsibility to try and enforce them against others, since your doing so will more often than not result in a more dangerous situation than if you had left the other driver alone. Every cop I know will tell you that it's okay to speed up beyond the limit in order to pass someone if doing so will result in a safer driving situation for the people involved. And at least where I live, failing to do so means that you need to drop back and get out of the left lane if you want to be law-abiding. Either way, it's safer for everyone involved.

You do realize that he's complaining about people engaging in illegal practices, right? Where I live, cops regularly enforce the "Left lane for passing only" signs that were posted within the last year on our main freeway.

Can you send me some of your cops? One of the states that borders where I live (Missouri) I think they teach them in drivers ed that they are supposed to hang in the left lane. It's illegal where I live but I've never seen it enforced.

Ha, yeah, it was a rather pleasant surprise (at least for me and only in this one regard) when I heard about some of my friends getting pulled over for not using the lane to pass. That said, we still have our share of people who think those signs are suggestions and that the 75mph speed limit must be a typo that was intended to say 65mph. They're thankfully just a bit less frequent than they used to be.

LOL, I see that too. Here in NJ the speed limit is (usually) 65MpH on the major highways. But I see out-of-staters and such riding at 55MpH even though they've passed like their 3rd speed-limit-sign. So either they're not paying enough attention (and are dangerous) or are stupid and think the state posted the wrong sign umpteen times.

One guy I was speaking to while travelling said the national speed limit was 55MpH and there was no such thing as a USA highway (interstate or otherwise) with a 65 or 75 lim

You do realize that he's complaining about people engaging in illegal practices, right? Where I live, cops regularly enforce the "Left lane for passing only" signs that were posted within the last year

I live in California where it has been illegal to clog the passing lane for years and I see cops come up behind people in the left lane and then just go around them all the damned time.

No one said you had to dodge back into the right lane immediately after every single car. Once you pass a car, if you're going faster than the next car in the right lane then you're still in the process of passing, so you'd be perfectly fine in staying in the right lane, and even you must have enough common sense to recognize that. You're doing a disservice to yourself by playing the fool.

I'd fully agree. "Left lane for passing only" laws are not a license to engage in dangerous behavior. Like you, if a car is coming up fast behind me and I'm in the left lane, I'll do what I can to get out of their way in a safe manner, but my inability to do so does not give them an excuse to do whatever they feel like doing. If someone is dodging in and out of traffic, they're making things more dangerous for everyone, and we can both agree on that.

From firsthand experience, I agree with you about that being the safest tactic to use on an individual basis (and it's what I practice most of the time, since it means only having to watch one side rather than two, which allows me to maintain a better awareness). That said, like many other systems, it breaks down if everyone is doing it, thus leading to reduced overall safety. Hence the laws, which are there to promote safety for as many people as possible (at least in theory...obviously there are politics

I can understand the left-lane being safer. With the right-lane you have people jumping in to take that exit they're about to miss and perhaps sideswiping you, people parked on the shoulder, people merging with traffic, etc. I've never seen hard-data but I wouldn't doubt that it's true. I could see the middle-lane being the in-between-safety.

But then, as you say, try to stay in a high-percentile of the speed. Don't drive insane-speeds, but at least keep up with the flow of traffic.

You're not the NASCAR pace car. You are not entitled to the authority of policing the speeds of other drivers. Blocking the left lane for faster traffic is a misdemeanor moving violation in nearly all US municipalities regardless to the oncoming driver's speed.

At a crosswalk I once held out my arm in front of a jaywalker. He had his head down in his phone with his earbuds in, he was following the tail of a crowd across a normally not-busy street, he didn't realize the light had completely changed, and he apparently didn't notice there was traffic approaching rapidly from his left. Did I interfere with his right to jaywalk? Yes, intentionally. What would it say about me as a person if I hadn't limited that guy from passing me, and let him step into that street

No, I think most don't realize they are a) in the so-called fast lane, b) don't realize that they are only supposed to be there to pass, c) don't realize that you can break (b) if you don't go fast enough (including over the speed limit) and c) don't realize or utilize their rear view mirrors.

First thing this proposal needs is a way to update the firmware of any such technology in a direct, physical, and only-by-the-driver fashion. Because if there's one thing I've learned about government-sponsored "standards" in technology... it's that they will fuck it up.

The best approach will probably be creating some kind of virtual stack with an API interface to applications; Keep it flexible so that as security vulnerabilities are discovered (they WILL be discovered), the network stack itself can be upgraded. It should also be mandatory that manufacturers support any device/vehicle for at least twenty years. None of this crap like we have with cell phones where only a few patches or upgrades are released and then "ha ha, that's it... upgrade to our newer model now!" As well, every device should be required to be updated at least once a year; That all firmware has an expiration date, and newer versions of the protocol are intentionally only backwards compatible for one or two revisions prior.

This will ensure that (eventually) any vulnerable device or exploit is eventually totally removed from the road. Any such communication tech should also fail safe -- that is, if it isn't upgraded, or whatever... it just disables itself allowing for manual control. The operator should also have the option of immediately discontinuing connections to earlier versions of the protocol or disabling the device entirely (manual mode), and such options should be easily-accessible without any tools or special knowledge.

Lastly, all vehicles should have a prominent fail-safe button readily accessible by the driver without needing to take his/her eyes off the road, and should be tactile (not these capacitive buttons, but a real pushable button), which immediately disables all automation and computer control and resets all inputs to a "fail-safe" manual level to allow for immediate operation of the vehicle -- specifically to bring it to a stop as quickly and safely as possible. This button (ideally) will be located on the steering wheel or column and can be hit without taking hands off the wheel. Basically... and emergency kill switch that engages mechanical and direct linkage to critical vehicle inputs like steering, braking, and throttle.

It should also be mandatory that manufacturers support any device/vehicle for at least twenty years.

No, because it is safe to assume that the manufacturers will lock down the device so that only they can create updates for it, and it is safe to assume that manual driving will become more and more restricted over time. Setting any specific time limit is thus equivalent to planned obsolescence on a nationwide scale.

Manufacturers should be required to update the firmware for as long as a single copy of that c

The manufacturer should have the ability to push an "unsafe firmware" notice to the device. If the device sees that flag, it should immediately flag that version of the firmware as potentially dangerous. If it is currently booted from the unsafe version and if it has another version installed that is not flagged, it should immediately find a safe spot to pull over, pull over, reboot from the other version of the firmware, and continue the trip.

Where Do You Want To Go Today?<xxx>Do you mean _Wally Mart_? There are Many Attractive Offers of Name-Brand Merchandise today.No!Got It. Wally Mart has a fine selection of store-brand items at major discounts, perfect for your.... h.e.m.m.o.r.r.h.o.i.d.... interest. We'll be there in about 17 minutes.Stop !I'm sorry, I'm afraid I can't do that, we are not at our destination.

Fantastic, then the NSA can monitor where we go, where we stop, and if we change the oil on schedule. If we are "suspected of being a terrorist" the CIA can direct our car over a cliff, into a fireworks stand, or into a farming combine to make it look like an accident.

Many traffic management systems sniff for the MAC address on your bluetooth and use it to monitor traffic flow. It wouldn't be a stretch to expand on that by shipping vehicles with preset, and registered, addresses.

Your car already auto-reports on you and reports to your insurance company and the manufacturer in the event of an accident. Assuming your car has been manufactured since the turn of the century it probably has a black box that records the last X-many seconds of driving behavior (and since memory is getting cheaper that X has been growing). Currently the black box is only accessible from a hard connection, but I would not be at all surprised to see them start to dump their data to roadside APs in exchange